Arsenal Transfer News: Gunners May Lose out on Signing Nuri Sahin
The news comes as something of a shock to the footballing world, as it seemed almost inevitable at one stage that the Turkish midfielder would eventually find his way to London during the summer transfer window.
Now it seems as though fellow Premier League rivals, Liverpool, will be the side most likely to snatch up the hot young prospect.
Arsenal have made it very apparent that if they do take Sahin on, they want it to be on a permanent basis, and not just as a loan deal.
This was always something that would throw a spanner in the works in regards to the transfer of the 23-year-old.
Sahin is considered one of the brightest young talents in the game today, and at a club like Madrid, has the potential backing to go on and be one of the next generation of great players.
As such, the Galacticos are not happy to let Nuri leave the club altogether, optimally wanting him to go out and get some first-team experience at one of the other top clubs in Europe before coming back a better and more efficient player.
Liverpool now appear to be the perfect vessel for this motive.
Brendan Rogers is more than happy to take on the Turk's services for just one season, before allowing Real to reap the rewards upon his return to the Bernabeau.
The news is certainly not disastrous for Arsenal, but at the same time, may come as a blow to some fans who were particularly looking forward to Sahin joining the Gunners' midfield.
Arsenal have taken heavy losses this transfer window, but also made some considerable gains in the shapes of Lukas Podolski, Santi Cazorla and Olivier Giroud.
Sahin would have been another excellent addition to that list, but for now, it seems as though this particular ship has sailed.
But then again, this is football. I wouldn't be too shocked if, tomorrow, we hear that Sahin will be wearing the red and white of Arsenal this season.
Only time can reveal Sahin's future path.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?